IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iefi16/244531.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does having a Choice make a Difference? Market Potential of the Animal Welfare Label in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit
  • Purwins, Nina

Abstract

This paper investigates the effects of the introduction of a specific animal welfare label on consumer decision making when shopping for pork. Based on two empirical studies, we analyze whether substitution effects between organic, regional, and animal welfare products have to be expected under current market conditions. Our results show that persons with preference for animal welfare decide significantly more often for the animal welfare or the organic product, not for local, and that organic heavy buyers do not differ from rest of sample with respect to animal welfare or local choice. The animal welfare label as stand-alone selling proposition may be too weak to create value added. Based on the examination of interaction terms, we find that organic does not gain by combination with an animal welfare label, whereas regional labels are not associated yet with animal welfare and would profit more by including an additional informational cue. We tentatively conclude that animal welfare programs should be embedded in regional marketing programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit & Purwins, Nina, 2016. "Does having a Choice make a Difference? Market Potential of the Animal Welfare Label in Germany," 2016 International European Forum (151st EAAE Seminar), February 15-19, 2016, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 244531, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi16:244531
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.244531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/244531/files/43-B9_Schulze-Ehlers%20_%20Purwins%202016%20Does%20having%20a%20choice%20make%20a%20difference_submit.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.244531?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    2. Zenner, Silvia & Wirthgen, Bernd & Altmann, Marianne, 2005. "Präferenzen für unterschiedliche Produktionsverfahren und Herkunftsbezeichnungen – dargestellt am Beispiel eines Lebensmittels aus der Direktvermarktung," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 54(02), pages 1-7.
    3. Jayson L. Lusk & Brian C. Briggeman, 2009. "Food Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 184-196.
    4. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    5. Yuko Onozaka & Dawn Thilmany Mcfadden, 2011. "Does Local Labeling Complement or Compete with Other Sustainable Labels? A Conjoint Analysis of Direct and Joint Values for Fresh Produce Claim," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 689-702.
    6. Loureiro, Maria L. & Hine, Susan E., 2002. "Discovering Niche Markets: A Comparison Of Consumer Willingness To Pay For Local (Colorado Grown), Organic, And Gmo-Free Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1-11, December.
    7. Jutta Roosen & Jayson L. Lusk & John A. Fox, 2003. "Consumer demand for and attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France, Germany, and the UK," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 77-90.
    8. Lusk, Jayson L. & Briggeman, Brian C., 2008. "AJAE appendix for “Food Values”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 1-12, February.
    9. Carl Johan Lagerkvist & Sebastian Hess, 2011. "A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 55-78, March.
    10. Carolina Liljenstolpe, 2008. "Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: an application to Swedish pig production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 67-84.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Purwins, Nina & Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit, 2018. "Improving market success of animal welfare programs through key stakeholder involvement: heading towards responsible innovation?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(4).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barlagne, Carla & Bazoche, Pascale & Thomas, Alban & Ozier-Lafontaine, Harry & Causeret, François & Blazy, Jean-Marc, 2015. "Promoting local foods in small island states: The role of information policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 62-72.
    2. Marco A. Palma & Alba J. Collart & Christopher J. Chammoun, 2015. "Information Asymmetry in Consumer Perceptions of Quality-Differentiated Food Products," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 596-612, November.
    3. Mosier, Samantha L. & Thilmany, Dawn, 2016. "Diffusion of food policy in the U.S.: The case of organic certification," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 80-91.
    4. Printezis, Iryna & Grebitus, Carola, 2018. "Marketing Channels for Local Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 161-171.
    5. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    6. Asche, Frank & Larsen, Thomas A. & Smith, Martin D. & Sogn-Grundvåg, Geir & Young, James A., 2015. "Pricing of eco-labels with retailer heterogeneity," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 82-93.
    7. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    8. Shi, Wei & Halstead, John & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2016. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Locally Grown Produce: Comparison of New Hampshire and Massachusetts Results," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236109, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Rajo, Lindelly A. & Michelle S, Segovia & Arias, Fredi & Marco A., Palma, 2016. "Willingness-to-Pay for an Educational Label: The Zamorano University Brand," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-14, February.
    10. Sackett, Hillary & Shupp, Robert & Tonsor, Glynn, 2016. "Differentiating “Sustainable” From “Organic” And “Local” Food Choices: Does Information About Certification Criteria Help Consumers?," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Elisa Giampietri & Dieter B. A. Koemle & Xiaohua Yu & Adele Finco, 2016. "Consumers’ Sense of Farmers’ Markets: Tasting Sustainability or Just Purchasing Food?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 137-150.
    13. Faical Akaichi & Klaus Glenk & Cesar Revoredo‐Giha, 2022. "Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 349-370, April.
    14. Zaffou, Madiha & Campbell, Benjamin L. & Martin, Jennifer, 2014. "Using a Randomized Choice Experiment to Test Willingness to Pay for Multiple Differentiated Products," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 176910, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Zheng, Qiujie & Wang, H. Holly, 2016. "Chinese preferences for sustainable attributes for food away from home: A rank-ordered model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 148-158.
    16. Chiara Paffarini & Biancamaria Torquati & Tiziano Tempesta & Sonia Venanzi & Daniel Vecchiato, 2021. "Rural sustainability and food choice: the effect of territorial characteristics on the consumers’ preferences for organic lentils," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Glenk, Klaus & Eory, Vera & Colombo, Sergio & Barnes, Andrew, 2014. "Adoption of greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture: An analysis of dairy farmers' perceptions and adoption behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 49-58.
    18. Brenna Ellison & Kathleen Brooks & Taro Mieno, 2017. "Which livestock production claims matter most to consumers?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 819-831, December.
    19. Ying, Jiahui & Shonkwiler, Vanessa P. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2018. "Willingness to Pay or Not to Pay: Valuing Foods Some Respondents Find Distasteful," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274065, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Schreiner, J.A., 2018. "Assessing consumer and producer preferences for animal welfare using a common elicitation format," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277467, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:iefi16:244531. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilbonde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.